Populism and Europe’s Future

Populist sentiment may be just a groundswell of discontent among a minority, but it canalso affect major political developments, depending on its momentum and the issues involved.

by Paul Kieffer
November 16, 2010

Populist movements have played an important
role in calling for change in democratic – and
nondemocratic – countries over the last 150 years.
Derived from the Latin word populus (people), populism
generally refers to a political movement that capitalizes on
dissatisfaction with the status quo, social conflict or fear
and unrest. Populism often rears its head during times of rapid
societal change and is usually identified with a charismatic
personality who leads the movement or personifies its
goals.

The Encyclopedia of Democracy defines populism as "a
political movement that emphasizes the interests, cultural
traits, and spontaneous feelings of the common people, as
opposed to those of a privileged elite. For legitimation,
populist movements often appeal to the majority will directly
– through mass gatherings, referendums, or other forms of
popular democracy – without much concern for checks and
balances or the rights of minorities" (Seymour Lipset, ed.,
1996, p. 985).

The recent Tea Party movement in the United States is
characterized by some, such as Howard Fineman writing in
Newsweek, as populist sentiment that "is nothing new. If
you don't count Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson, it goes
back at least to the anti-immigration Know Nothings of the
1840s . . . In the decades after [the Civil War],
populist movements rose on the left, from Wobblies to
progressives. Their energy and agendas found their way into
electoral politics, especially in the first half of the last
century, and in the civil-rights and antiwar movements of the
1960s and early 1970s" ("Party Time," April 6, 2010).

Fineman's perception that populist agendas are later
reflected in electoral politics is evident in two populist
movements dating back to the end of the 19th and the beginning
of the 20th centuries. The Populist Party advocated a graduated
income tax and the direct election of senators (two ideas that
became popular among the larger two political parties and
resulted in Constitutional amendments establishing them). The
Progressive Party in the early 20th century promoted
regulations for business and civil service reform (both ideas
became reforms of the government, involving such ideas as
antitrust legislation and civil service exams).

In these examples, what began as a groundswell of concern
and discontent wound up influencing legislation. In other
words, when populist ideas get too popular to successfully
resist, they can be adopted by the established political
parties to prevent erosion of their base of support. In this
way, populist movements "can provide a useful 'wake-up call' to
elites and public officials who have grown too cozy with their
privileges and too remote from the concerns of public opinion"
(Marc Plattner, "Populism, Pluralism, and Liberal Democracy,"
Journal of Democracy, January 2010, pp. 88-89).
Moreover, modern populist movements may provide a challenge to
the political correctness practiced by governments and the
established political system.

Islam and political correctness in
Europe

One major challenge in Europe is the acceptance of the
Islamic religion and culture in an environment that has been
predominantly non-Islamic for centuries. The tension created by
what some view as Islam's "encroachment" via population growth
generates the kind of fear that provides a fertile ground for
populist sentiment.

If the growing Muslim population in Europe is creating a
breeding ground for apprehension, the political correctness of
Europe's traditional political parties and governments is
adding fertilizer to the mix.

Consider that mainstream European media and political
leaders often emphasize that the vast majority of Muslims
living in Europe are peaceful and nonviolent – that it is
only a minuscule minority of radical Islamists who are giving
their religion a bad name.

Europeans concerned about the population growth of Europe's
Muslim minority are wary of Turkey's bid to join the European
Union. Were Turkey to become a member of the EU, the percentage
of Muslims living in the EU on that day would jump from about 5
percent currently to more than 20 percent. Supporters of
Turkish EU membership generally follow the politically correct
position of proclaiming the need for Turkey to be fully
integrated into Europe's institutions. However, it is no small
number of Europeans who are more concerned about the potential
onslaught of Muslim migration from Turkey into countries like
France, Germany and the Netherlands, once Turkish citizens are
granted the right to live and work anywhere in the European
Union.

In 2005 an opinion poll in France showed that 35 percent of
those who voted against the EU constitution were influenced by
the possibility that Turkey might some day become an EU member.
In what might be considered a populist move, former French
President Jacques Chirac – recognizing the misgivings his
countrymen had about Turkish EU membership – promised
that France's decision on Turkish EU membership would be made
by a national referendum.

Populist sentiment grows in Germany

The perception of a threat to traditional European culture
by a growing Muslim community provides a classic impetus for
populist sentiment. Last summer traditional political parties
and news media in Germany were surprised by the support voiced
for Thilo Sarrazin, who at the time was on the board of
directors of Germany's federal bank (Bundesbank).

In August Sarrazin published a book titled Deutschland
Schafft Sich Ab: Wie Wir Unser Land Aufs Spiel Setzen
(Germany Is Eliminating Itself: How We Put Our Country at
Risk). In the book Sarrazin criticized Muslim immigrants
for being unwilling to integrate fully into German society,
causing additional social costs to German taxpayers. Sarrazin's
opinion on this subject had not changed much since September
2009, when he said in an interview that he did "not have to
acknowledge anyone who lives at the expense of the state that
he rejects, does not provide for the education of his children
in a reasonable manner and continually produces new little
girls wearing a head covering."

The "official" reaction to Sarrazin's book and a
controversial speech he had given in June was predictable.
Politically correct politicians and media criticized him for
being intolerant, and he later resigned from the Bundesbank's
board of directors. Others, however, welcomed Sarrazin's book
as an opening to discuss subjects that have been off-limits in
Germany for years. A public opinion poll conducted by the
Allensbach Institute found 60 percent of those surveyed
describing Mr. Sarrazin as saying "many things that are
correct," while only 13 percent disagreed with his
viewpoint.

Populist sentiment was also evident when Dutch Member of
Parliament Geert Wilders spoke in Berlin on Oct. 2, 2010, to
700 invited guests who had assembled to celebrate the birth of
a new political party in Germany: the Freedom Party of
conservative Berlin politician René Stadtkewitz.
Stadtkewitz had earlier been expelled from the conservative
Christian Democratic Union (CDU) for having invited Wilders to
Berlin. Called a "rightist populist" by German media, Wilders
had no qualms about describing his perception of what Germany
needs in his Oct. 2 speech:

"Germany needs a political movement to defend German identity
and to oppose the Islamization of Germany. Chancellor Angela
Merkel says that the Islamization of Germany is inevitable. She
conveys the message that citizens have to be prepared for more
changes as a result of immigration. She wants the Germans to
adapt to this situation.

"The Christian-Democrat leader said: 'More than before mosques
will be an integral part of our cities.' My friends, we should
not accept the unacceptable as inevitable without trying to
turn the tide. It is our duty as politicians to preserve our
nations for our children . . . A Germany full of
mosques and veiled women is no longer the Germany of Goethe,
Schiller and Heine, Bach and Mendelssohn."

In the same speech, Wilders also indirectly addressed the
controversy over failed intregration policies in Germany by
referring to a controversial visit made by Turkish Prime
Minister Recep Erdogan to the Turkish community in Cologne in
2008:

"When the Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan visited your country
in 2008, he told the Turks living here that they had to remain
Turks. He literally said that 'assimilation is a crime against
humanity.' Erdogan would have been right if he had been
addressing the Turks in Turkey. However, Germany is the land of
the Germans. Hence, the Germans have a right to demand that
those who come to live in Germany assimilate; they have the
right – no they have a duty to their children – to
demand that newcomers respect the German identity of the German
nation and Germany's right to preserve its identity."

A small group of protestors assembled across the street from
the hotel where Wilders spoke, carrying signs warning about the
danger of neo-Nazism, including caricatures of Adolf Hitler.
Perceptive analysts realize, however, that Wilders is no
neo-Nazi. Instead, the response to his message – along
with the reaction to Thilo Sarrazin's book – reveal a
potential populist vote perhaps as high as 20 percent "to the
right of the CDU," Chancellor Merkel's own party.

Germany's conservative shift

As noted earlier in this article, "populist movements can
provide a useful 'wake-up call' to elites and public officials"
(Plattner, ibid.). As quoted earlier, Howard Fineman observed
in Newsweek that populist "energy and agendas found
their way into electoral politics" in the United States. Are
there indications that the same thing is already happening in
Germany, the country that Geert Wilders further described as "a
benefit to all of us, because the well-being and prosperity of
Germany is a prerequisite for the well-being and prosperity of
Europe?" (Berlin speech, Oct. 2, 2010).

If populist sentiment were to mobilize 20 percent of
eligible voters in Germany "to the right of the CDU," the big
losers would be the CDU itself and its Bavarian sister party,
the Christian Socialist Union (CSU). One reason for the current
sentiment is that the CDU/CSU coalition itself is no longer as
conservative as it once was.

In her keynote address at the CDU party convention in
November, Chancellor Merkel appeared to respond to populist
concerns in the ongoing debate on the assimilation of
immigrants: "Whoever wants to live here has to learn German.
Whoever lives here has to respect our laws and values
. . . Those who do not follow the rules can expect to
face sanctions" (http://www.dw-world.de).

Merkel went on to say that Germany's problem is not too much
Islam, "but too little Christianity. We speak too little of our
Judeo-Christian heritage" (Der Spiegel, Nov. 15, 2010)
She called for more emphasis on Christian values – an
interesting statement at a time when Pope Benedict XVI has
declared the "re-Christianization" of Europe to be a major goal
of his papacy.

It is clear that leaders of Merkel's sister party are also
considering the impact of populist sentiment. On the weekend
that Wilders spoke in Berlin, CSU minister of defense
Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg called him "one of those charlatans
making the rounds these days." However, Zu Guttenberg admitted
what was obvious: "We haven't sufficiently led the discussion"
on citizens' concerns about Muslim immigration.

Zu Guttenberg's CSU party colleague, Bavarian governor Horst
Seehofer, pulled no punches in an interview and a speech given
just two weeks after Wilders' visit to Berlin. Seehofer said
that Germany "did not need any additional immigration from
Turkey and Arab countries," adding that Germany "is not the
welfare office for the entire world." Seehofer's comments on
immigration from Islamic countries would have been unthinkable
just 10 years ago, but public opinion surveys showed roughly
half of those responding agreeing with him.

Seehofer also denounced the multicultural approach of
so-called parallel societies existing with each other.
"Multicultural is dead," he declared, emphasizing that
immigrants had to be absorbed into the dominant German culture
(Leitkultur) with its value system based on the
Christian heritage. Just days after Seehofer's speech,
Chancellor Merkel agreed with him that the multicultural
approach had failed.

How far will Germany's conservative political parties go in
their response to growing concerns over Germany's immigration
and integration policies? What if they are unsuccessful in
assimilating those motivated by populist sentiment? When asked
about the ongoing debate over the Muslim community in Germany,
former chancellor Helmut Schmidt admitted that Germans had not
been able to integrate the 4 million Muslims already living in
his country. He also indirectly confirmed the negative
connotation that "populism" tends to have in Germany. "So far,"
he said, "we don't have that [rightist] party" to the right of
the CDU/CSU. "The reason is Nazism and Auschwitz. This is the
reason for the time being, and hopefully for the future" (as
quoted in "Germany Risks a Lurch to the Right," New York
Times, Oct. 11, 2010).

In today's liberal environment in Europe, there would have
to be a radical shift in thinking for a neo-Nazi movement to
gain a following large enough to infuence German – or
larger European – politics. A more likely possibility,
based on current developments, is a future combination of
populist sentiment and reawakened religious fervor.

The papacy's emphasis on promoting a rebirth of Christianity
in Europe, coupled with populist concerns over growing Muslim
influence, could prepare the stage for a future charismatic
Christian leader to play a dominant role in shaping Europe's
future. Bible prophecy indicates that this scenario is more
than just a speculative possibility. It will one day be the
wave of the future.

Developments in Europe will surprise a world unaware of what
the Bible has to say about the time leading up to the
prophesied return of Jesus Christ. However, you don’t
have to remain uninformed. I recommend the free booklets
You Can Understand Bible
Prophecy and The Book of Revelation
Unveiled, both available free of charge upon
request.